




^ 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




011 896 373 8 



pH8 



E 386 

Copyl SPEECH 



HENRY CLAY, OF KENTUCKY, 



CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS OFFERED TO THE SENATE OF THE UNITED 
STATES, IN DECEMBER, 1S37, 

BY MR. CALHOUN, OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 

INVOLVING 

PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION 
OF THE UNITED STATES ; 

THE SUBJECT OF THE 
ABOIjITION of SI.AVERY IN THE DISTRICT OF COIiUMBIA 

AND THE TERRITORIES OF THE UNITED STATES; 



THE RIGHT OF PETITION ON THAT SUBJECT. 



Delivered in the Senate U. S., January 9, 1838. 



WASHINGTON: 

PRINTED BV GALEvS AND SEATON. 

1838. 



N 

^ SPEECH. 



The question being on the adoption of tlie first of the two following 
resolutions, in the series presented by Mr. Calhoun, to wit : 

"Resolved, That the intermeddling of any State or States, or their citizens, to 
abolish slavery in this District, or any of the Territories, on the ground, or un- 
der the pretext, that it is immoral or sinful, or the passage of any act or meas- 
ure of Congress, with that view, would be a direct and dangerous attack on the 
institutions of all the slaveholding States. 

"Resolved, That the union of these States rests on an equality of rights and ad- 
vantages among its members ; and that whatever destroys that equality tends to 
destroy the Union itself; and that it is the solemn duty of all, and more especial- 
ly of this body, which represents the States in their corporate capacity, to resist 
all attempts to discriminate between the States in extending the benefits of the 
Government to the several portions of the Union ; and that to refuse to extend to 
the southern and western States any advantage which would tend to strengthen 
or render them more secure, or increase their limits or population by the annex- 
ation of new territory or States, on the assumption, or under the pretext, that 
the Institution of slavery, as it exists among them, is immoral or sinful, or other- 
wise obnoxious, would be contrary to that equality of rights and advantages 
which the constitution was intended to secure alike to all the members of the 
Union, and would, in effect, disfranchise the slaveholding States, withholding 
from them the advantages, while it subjected them to the burdens, of the Gov- 
ernment." 

Mr. Clay, of Kentucky, rose to say a {evi words. He said that he 
could vote for neither the fifth nor sixth resolution, in the shape 
in which they were presented by the Senator from South Carolina. 
Although he had risen to state his objections particularly to the fifth, now 
that he was up, he would make some general observations on the whole 
subject of the series of resolutions. 

T have voted, (continued Mr. C.) without hesitation, for the first reso- 
lutions offered by that Senator, after they were modified or amended, 
not from any confidence which I have in their healing virtues. I have 
voted for them as abstract propositions, and in the sense in which I un- 



derstand then? , that is, iii the plain natural sense which their language- 
imports. With respect to the point, so much insisted upon in this debate* 
and which had produced great controversy in former times, whether the 
constitution is to be regarded as the work of the people of the United 
States collectively, or of the separate States composing the Confederacy^ 
i have always thought that more importance is attached to it than it de- 
serves. Whether formed in the one mode or the other, the powers grant- 
ed in the constitution, and its true interpretation, are exactly the same. 
The real question in considering the instrument is, not how the constitu- 
tion was made, but what is it, as it is? What arc the powers delegated 
by it, the powers necessary and proper to carry into effect the delegated 
powers, its prohibitions ? What, in short, is the sum of its whole pow- 
ers? I have always understood, according to historical fact, that the 
constitution was framed by a Convention, composed of delegates ap- 
pointed by the Legislatures of the several States ; and that after it was 
adopted, it was submitted to Conventions of Delegates, chosen by the 
people of the several States, each acting separately by and for itself; 
and, being ratified by the Conventions of a sufficient number, it became 
♦he constitution of the United States, or, in its own language, of the peo- 
ple of the United States. 

The series of resolutions under consideraliorv has been introduced by 
the Senator from South Carolina, after he and other Senators from the 
South had deprecated discussion on the delicate subject to which they 
relate. They have occasioned much discussion, in which hitherto I have- 
not participated. I hope that the tendency of the resolutions may be 
to allay the excitement which unhappily prevails, in respect to the aboli- 
tion of slavery ; but I confess, Mr. President, that, taken altogether, and 
in connexion with other circumstances, and especially considering the 
manner in which tlieir author has pressed them on the Senate, I fear that 
they will have the opposite efiect ; and particularly at tfie North, that 
they may increase and exasperate, instead of diminishing and assuaging 
the existing irritation. I apprehend that they will only aerve to furnish 
new texts for fresh commentary and further divisions. And I cannot 
but regard the unnecessary combination of the subject of abolition with 
that alien and the most exciting of all subjects at the present period, the 
annexation of Texas to the United States, in the same series of resolu- 
tions, as peculiarly unfortunate. I know that Texas is not specially 
mentioned in the last resolution, but the counuy will understand the in- 
tention and allusion of the resolution as distinctly as if it had been ex- 
pressly designated. It cannot be forgotten that, immediately after the 
tidings of the memorable battle of San Jacinto reached this city, the 



Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Calhoun] expressed in the Senate 
his opinion that the independence of Texas ought immediately to be rec" 
ognised, and his wish that, before the adjournment of Congress, it should 
be annexed to the United States. A resolution now lies upon the table 
of the Senate, introduced by the other Senator from South Carolina, 
[Mr. Prestox,] proposing a contingent annexation of it to the United 
States. When these facts are borne in mind, will not all understand the 
last resolution, although abstract in form, as intended to commit the Sen- 
ate, in advance, to the annexation ? Our purpose, our anxious aim, 
should be to compose the North, to arrest the progress of the spirit of ab-| 
olition, and to give strength and confidence to the numerous friends of 
the Union in that quarter. Is it, then, wise and discreet to blend these 
two unhappy causes of agitation together? Had we not better keep 
them separate and distinct, and act on the prudent maxim, that sufikient 
for the day is the evil thereof? 

The Senator from South Carolina has oftered his resolutions, he tells 
us, to revive and rally the State rights [arty. But I cannot think that 
the slaveholding States ought to consent to place their peculiar interests 
in the exchisire safe-keeping of any one party, however correct some of 
us may believe its principles to be. Are not the clear, undoubted, ac- 
knowledged guarantees in the constitution of those interests far above 
and superior to any security which can be derived from the pirticular 
tenets of any party 1 Parties rise up and go down, but the constitu- 
tion remains a perpetual and sure bulwark against all attacks upon the 
rights of the slaveholding States, from whatever quarter they may pro- 
ceed. No, sir, do not let us put our trust in any party exclusively ; let 
us invoke the united guardianship of all — the Whigs, the Democratic 
party, the Republican party, the Jackson Van Buren party, the Federal 
party, the Union party, the Nullifiers, and the Locofocos — all, in pre- 
serving the inviolability of the constitution, and protecting against every en- 
croachment delicate and momentous interests, which cannot be seriously 
touched without endangering the stability of our entire political fabric. 

We want in the slaveholding States nothing done here to stimulate our 
vigilance, or to unite us upon the subject of our present deliberations. 
We may differ there in the degree of sensibility which we display ; but 
we are all firmly and unanimously resolved to defend and maintain our 
rights at all hazards. And, should the hour of trial ever come, those who 
appear now the least agitated will not be behind those who are foremost 
and loudest in proclaiming the existence of danger. The object of the 
Senate should be to allay excitement, quiet the public mind, and check 
the progress of the spirit of abolition at the North; and, above all. 



strengthen the well-disposed, and to give no advantage to agitators. It 
was with that view I have inquired of northern Senators, charged with 
the presentation of abolition petitions, whether the spirit of abolitionism 
was spreading ; and, if so, what was the cause 1 Their answer was, that 
it was increasing; and that the cause was the impression which the abo- 
litionists had been able to make on the northern mind, thai the constitu- 
tional right of petition was denied them by the two Houses of Congress. 
This statement is corroborated and confirmed by information which has 
reached me through a variety of channels. Many who are not abolition- 
ists are induced to join them, because they believe the right of petition 
has been practically denied. On this subject allow me to read an extract 
from a letter (the perusal of the whole letter is at the service of any Sen- 
ator) which I have lately received, addressed to me by a highly intelli- 
gent and patriotic gentleman in Rhode Island. [Here Mr. Clay read 
the following extract :] 

" I have been so much gratified with your remarks in relation to the cause of 
the increase of the abolitionists in the North, that 1 thought it might do soitie 
good, and at least relieve my own mind, if I stated to you what we think on the 
subject here. There is no doubt but that the abolitionists are recruiting hefe, 
by the artful mode in which they turn to their account the spirit or sensitiveness 
manifested by the southern members on the subject of slavery ; and they are en- 
couraged, also, to greater efforts, because they think they see in all this a proof 
that the work of agitation is thus begun in the South, and that the leaven will 
work until the whole lump is leavened. If the petitions for the abolition of 
slavery in the District of Columbia had been duly received and considered as 
other petitions would have been, 1 have no doubt this agitating subject, if not 
put entirely at rest, at least would not now have been so connected with tlie sa- 
cred right of petition as to enable it to produce the effect it now does amongst us. 

" At our last election f<ir members of Congress, letters were sent from the 
secretary of the anti-slavery society to each of the candidates, requiring of them 
a communication of their sentiments on the right of Congress to abolish slavery 
111 the District of Columbia, and the right o( petition to Congress on this subject, 
liach candidate answered (except one) in such a way as that he might have con- 
sistently received the votes of the abolitionists. If the simple question had been 
upon the expediency of abolishing slavery in the District of Columbia, these 
pentlemen would probably have all answered in the negative. You see, there- 
fore, how this question is brought to bear on the people, and through them on 
the members of Congress ^ and we, who feel opposed to the whole of this anti- 
slavery machinery, find ourselves deprived of the power of doing any thing ef- 
fectively by the impohtic zeal of southern gentlemen. To them, therefore, I 
would appeal, (unless, in truth, they are desirous of abandoning the Union,) that 
they would so let their moderation be known unto all men, that the fanatics of 
the North (as they choose to call them) may be put in the wrong before the 
whole people, so that their own friends here may have some ground to stand 
upon. 



" 1 look forward with great apprehension to the time when the North and the 
South shall he wianwiously divided with that zeal which may urge each to action 
on the subject of shivery. The Union will not only then be dissolved, but the 
people on both sides so exasperated, that a furious fanatical anti-slavery and pro- 
slavery war will be inevitable. Men enough will be found to seek to ride upon 
the whirlwind and direct the storm in the North as well as the South, and the 
Union and the spirit of republicanism will expire together amidst the throes 
and convulsions which will cover our now beautiful land with desolation. Does 
the chivalry of the South desire to point its lance at the breasts of the northern 
fanatics ? When was chivalry a match for fanaticism ! Let the crusades — let the 
success of Cromwell answer. When men already begin to court death in the 
cause of anti-slavery, as giving them the crown of martyrdom, (I allude to Love- 
joy, and we understand that another has already offered himself to share the 
same fate,) what may we not expect when patriotism shall arm in such a cause, 
and it shall become identified not merely with the liberty of the African, but 
our own liberty and prosperity ! And is it not well to look around us before we 
urge each other to this dread precipice ' If there is nothing due to those men 
at the North who are lighting up this flame, is there nothing due to those who 
are endeavoring or are desirous to extinguish it ? Is there nothing due to our 
common country — to the civilized world — that this light among the nations 
shonld not be extinguished, and extinguislied in blood '' Mr. Calhoun is reported 
as having spoken 'with contempt of the idea of arguing this question with the abo- 
iitio7iists by means of a report from a committee.' I ask him not so to argue with 
them ; but I ask liim so to argue with those who are not already with these men, 
as to prevent their enlisting under their sable binners. But if there are any men 
at the South who think as some of our northern men thought in former days, that 
our country is ' too big for union,' and ' that federalism is founded in mistake,' (the 
sentiments of Fisher Ames, published by his friends,) to them t have nothing to 
say, and of them I have nothing to hope, but that they will add fuel to the flames 
until their own people may be ready to trample upon that constitution under 
which we have so long prospered as a people, and which, if administered in it» 
true spirit, will ensure domestic tranquillity, promote the general welfare, and (in 
the language of its preamble) • secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and 
our posterity.' 

•' On this subject may we be advised by the wisdom of Washington in his fare- 
well address, and may • these counsels of an old and affectionate friend' (to use 
his own words) 'control the current of the passions, and prevent our nation from 
running the course which has hitherto marked the destiny of nations.' May they 
• moderate the fury of party spirit, and guard against the impostures of pretend- 
ed patriolism.* 

"1 have taken the liberty of writing you, currentt cala/no, this long letter ; my 
object is my best apology. We are bound together by a common interest; and, 
whilst so much is doing to ahenate us from each other, shall no voice be heard 
preaching peate, union, and concord "' 

I could not ofler you, sir, any argument so good as that which is so 
feelingly and eloquently enforced in the extract which I have just read. 



8 

It is well known to the Senate that 1 have constantly entertained the 
opinion that the best way to check the spirit of abolition was to receive, 
respectfully, and refer these petitions to the proper committee. That 
would be the Committee for the District of Columbia ; one now, and 
which probably has been, ever since the commencement of the Govern- 
ment, so constituted as to comprise a majority of members from the 
slaveholding States. If they were thus referred, silently referred, as has 
been the practice during a great part of the period of the existence of the 
Government, there would be no agitation fomented here, no ground for 
asserting that the sacred right of petition had been violated. 

The people may attempt to exercise that right in three different 
descriptions of cases : 1st. In instances where Congress manifestly does 
not possess the constitutional power to grant the relief prayed for. In 
these, the petition may be rejected instantly, without reference and with- 
out debate, and no just cause of complaint would exist. 2d. In cases 
where the constitutional power, the exercise of which is invoked, is con- 
troverted, doubtful, or uncertain. In these, a reference of the petition 
may be necessary to examine into the existence of the power, as well as 
into the expediency of exercising it. Of this controverted nature is the 
legislative power of Congress in this District. No one would contend 
that a petition to establish a Bank of the United States should be 
instantly rejected, without debate and without reference, upon the 
sole ground that a large portion of the Senate should think it unconstitu- 
tional. Other examples of contested powers may be easily conceived. 
And, 3dly. In cases where the power is incontestably possessed by Con- 
gress to grant the redress prayed for. In the last two descriptions of 
cases, I think that Congress is bound attentively to receive the petitions, 
and respectfully to dispose of them. A Government which, like ours, is 
the Government of the people, should be parentally administered, so as 
not only to do right, but, as far as possible, to give general satisfaction. 

It has been argued that, when a petition is once put in the possession 
of the Senate, the right of petition has been practically enjoyed ; and 
that the Senate may reject it instantly, refer it, lay it upon the table, or 
dispose of it as may be thought proper. Undoubtedly this is true ; but 
in the great business of human life, public and private, the manner in 
which it is transacted is often as important, sometimes more important, 
than what is done or refused. And a wise Government should be par- 
ticularly careful not to wound or inflame popular sensibility on subjects 
respecting which large masses choose to exercise the constitutional right 
of petition. The course which the Senate has pursued, in regard to these 
abolition petitions, for about two years past, is this : a Senator states 



9 

from his place that he is charged with the presentation of one of them, 
and moves that it be received. Another Senator thereupon rises, and 
moves that the motion to receive the petition be laid upon the table ; 
and the Senate accordingly orders the motion to receive the petition to 
be laid upon the table ; and thus the petition is not received in a parlia- 
mentary sense. The Senate does not decide the question of its reception. 

This coarse I have always thought unfortunate. It is unsatisfactory. 
The petitioners feel that they have been neglected, and they allege that 
the right of petition has been denied. But it has been contended that 
these petitioners are mad and reckless fanatics, and it has been indig- 
nantly asked whether they merit respectful treatment. Mr. President, 
my observation and experience in life have taught me, that when we 
are addressed or assailed, our conduct should not be regulated by the 
harsh, vituperative, or fanatical language, or the condition, whatever it 
may be, of those who approach us, b«t by the standard of our own re- 
spectability, standing, and character in life. And, in regard to these 
petitions, the question should not be so much what do the petitioners 
deserve, as what is due from the calm, elevated, dignified, august char- 
acter of the Senate of the United States? These petitioners, misguided 
as they are, and highly mischievous as I believe the tendency of their 
proceedings to be, are a part of the people of the United States, and our 
constituents. Shall we allow ourselves to be rash, to be moved by anger, 
or transported by rage, because fanatics, as they are called, or thought- 
less men and women, present petitions to accomplish an object which, 
if seriously entertained, would justly excite profound alarm? 

The mode of disposing of these petitions which the Senate has lately 
pursued has certainly not produced the tranquillizing effect so anxiously 
desired. It has, on the contrary, aggravated, and I fear will continue to 
aggravate, the disease. The abolitionists have not diminished, but in- 
creased, and increased, as the most satisfactory information assures us, 
because they have been able to persuade many that the right of petition 
is invaded and has been denied. And many who are not abolitionists 
now unite with them merely to assert and maintain the right of petition. 
It is to be seriously apprehended that co-operation for one purpose may 
ultimately lead to co-operation for other purposes, not within the original 
contemplation of the parties. If the Senate, by persisting in its recent 
course, enable the abolitionists to derive succor from new allies ; and if 
we should also unhappily place in their hands an additional instrument, 
by unnecessarily coupling the annexation of Texas with the subject of 
abolition in the same series of resolutions, then, indeed, there will be 
too much reason to apprehend that the North, at no distant day, will be 
united as one man. 



10 

It appears to mo, sir, that uliat becomes us is to keep the abolitionists 
separate and distinct from all other classes, standing out in bold and 
prominent relief; and the subject of abolition separate and distinct froro 
the right of petition, from Texas, and from all other subjects. Let them 
stand alone, unmixed with the rest of the community, without the general 
sympathy, and exposed to the overwhelming force of the united opinion 
of all who desire the peace, the harmony, and the union of this Confed- 
eracy. I would receive, respectfully receive, their petitions, refer them, 
and occasionally present calm, dispassionate, and argumentative reports 
against thtm. This is the manner in which petitions for abolition were 
received in the first Congress, upon the recommendation of Mr. Madison ; 
and that in wliich they were ever afterwards received, until the practice 
was changed about two years ago. What is there in the mere fact of 
the reception of a petition to create alarm 1 Or in its subsequent ref- 
erence, especially to a committee known to be hostile to its object? 

But it is said that these fanatics are beyond the reach of any argument; 
and it is triumphantly asked. Will you condescend to argue with such 
deluded persons? Yes! I say, yes. To preserve these admirable in- 
stitutions of ours and this glorious Union from the possibility of all 
danger, I would argue with any one, with lunatics themselves, in their 
lucid intervals, and argue again and again. It is not, however, to recall 
alone the abolitionists to a sense of peace and duty, that these appeals to 
the reason, the judgment, and the patriotism of the country should be 
sent forth from these halls. They would address themselves, with pow- 
erful eflect, to all that, vastly the largest, portion of the northern com- 
munity who are uninfected by abolitionism. When has Congress 
unsuccessfully appealed to the intelligence, the patriotism, and the valor 
of the American people? In such a cause we should never tire nor 
despair. 

Mr. President, 1 have no apprehension, not the smallest, for the safety 
of the Union, from any state of things which now exists. I will not 
answer for consequences which may ensue from harsh and opprobrious 
language, and from indiscretion and rashness on the part of individual* 
or of Cengress, here or elsewhere. We allow ourselves to speak too 
frequently, and with too much levity, of a separation of this Union. It 
is a terrible word, to which our ears should not be familiarized. I desire 
to see in continued safety and prosperity this Union, and no other union. 
I go for this Union as it is, one and indivisible, without diminution. I 
will neither voluntarily leave it, nor be driven out of it by force. Here, 
in my place, I shall contend for all the rights of the State which has sent 
me here. 1 shall contend for them with undoubting confidence, and in 



11 

all the security which the Union confers, under all the high sanction 
which the guarantees of the constitution afford, and with the perfect con- 
viction that they are safer in the Union than they would be out of the 
Union. I am opposed to all separate confederacies and to all sectional 
conventions. No state of actual danger exists to render them expedient, 
or to justify deliberation about them. This Union, this Government, 
has done nothing, nothing whatever, to excite the smallest alarm. It 
will do nothing : but if it should ; if, contrary to all human probability, 
the rights and the security of the slaveholding States shall be assailed by 
any authoritative act emanating from this Capitol, a state of things for- 
resistance, forcible resistance, will then occur. It will be time enough » 
then to act. INo man in full health will take medicine because he may| 
be sick, amputate a perfectly sound limb because it may be probably 
hereafter fractured or seized with gangrene, or perpetrate suicide because 
death is his ultimate and inevitable doom. When that fatal day shall come, 
if it ever do come, when the slaveholding States have to defend, by force, 
their rights, the State whose servant I am will rush to battle, as she always 
has done, with her accustomed ardor, and with gallantry unsurpassed by 
that of any other State. And those States and their citizens will be 
found to sustain these rights with most vigor and success, who, unmoved 
by false alarms or imaginary or aggravated dangers, with a firm and 
fixed purpose of soul, stand prepared, in every real exigency, to vindicate 
them at every extremity. 

Having, Mr. President, said so much on the general subject, with the 
permission of the Senate, I will read certain resolutions which I have 
prepared, embracing the whole ground occupied by any of the petitions 
in respect to domestic slavery in the United States. They are the fol- 
lowing : 

Resolved^ That the institution of domestic slavery, as now existing in many of 
the States of this Confederacy, is subject to the exclusive power and control of 
those States respectively ; and that no other State, nor the people of any other 
State, nor Congress, possess, or can rightfully exercise, any power or authority 
whatever to interfere in any manner therewith. 

Resolved, That if any citizens of the United States, regardless of the spirit of 
peace, harmony, and union, which should ever animate the various members of 
the Confederacy, and their respective citizens, shall present to the Senate any 
petitions touching the abolition of slavery in any of the States in which it exists, 
hU such petitions shall be instantly rejected, witliout debate, and without further 
or other proceedings thereon, as relating to an object palpably beyond the scope 
of the constitutional power of Congress. 

Resolved, That when the District of Columbia was ceded by the States of 
Virginia and Maryland to the United States, domestic slavery existed in both of 



12 

those States, including the ceded territory ; and that, as it still continues in both 
of them, it could not be abolished, within the District, without a violation of that 
good faith whicli was implied in the cession, and in the acceptance of the terri- 
tory, nor, unless compensation were made to the proprietors of slaves, without a 
manifest infringement of an amendment to the constitution of the United States, 
nor without exciting a degree of just alarm and apprehension in the States recog- 
nising slavery, far transcending, in mischievous tendency, any possible benefit 
which could be accomplished by the abolition. 

Resolved, therefore, That it is the deliberate judgment of the Senate, that the 
institution of domestic slavery ought not to be abolished within the District of 
Columbia ; and it earnestly hopes that all sincere friends of the Union and 
of harmony and general tranquillity will cease to agitate this disturbing ques- 
tion. But the Senate feels itself, at the same time, constrained, from a high 
sense of duty in respect to the constitutional right of petition, to declare that it 
holds itself bound to receive and respectfully to treat any petitions, couched in 
decorous language, which may be presented by citizens of the United Stales, 
touching slavery within the District of Columbia. 

Resolved, therefore, That, upon the presentation of any such petitions, they 
shall be received, and referred to the appropriate committee. 

Resolved, That it would be highly inexpedient to aboUsh slavery in Florida, 
the only Territory of the United States in which it now exists, because of the 
serious alarm and just apprehensions which would be thereby excited in the 
States sustaining that domestic institution ; because the people of that Territory 
have not asked it to be done, and, when admitted as a State into the Union, will 
be exclusively entitled to decide that question for themselves ; and, also, because 
it would be in violation of a solemn compromise, made at a memorable and crit- 
ical period in the history of this counti-y, by which, while slavery was prohibit 
ed north, it was admitted south, of the line of thirty-six degrees and thirty min. 
utes north latitude. 

Resolved, That no power is delegated by the constitution to Congress to pro- 
hibit, in or between the States tolerating slavery, the sale and removal of such 
persons as are held in slavery by the laws of those States. 

Resolved, That, whilst the Senate, with painful regret, has seen the perseve- 
rance of certain citizens of the United States in the agitation of the abolition of 
domestic slavery, thereby creating distrust, and discontent, and dissatisfaction 
among the people of the United States, who should ever cherish towards each 
other fraternal sentiments, it beholds, with the deepest satisfaction, every where 
prevailing an unconquerable attachment to the Union, as the sure bulwark of 
the safety, liberty, and happiness of the people of the United States. 

There is nothing abstract or metaphysical in them. They relate to 
the abolition of slavery in the States, in the District of Columbia, and in 
Florida, the only Territory of the United States where it exists, and to 
the sale and removal of slaves in the States whose laws recognise the in 
slitution of slavery. They cover the whole field, and nothing but the 
field. They have no ulterior views. They approach the subject in hand, 
directly, without the necessity of auy interpretation. They do not seek 



13 

to renovate any party, nor to place ibc high interests to which they re- 
late in the exclusive custody of any one party. Resting upon, and sus- 
tained by, the constitution, they appeal to the sound discretion, the sober 
judgment, and the patriotism of all parties. I may not ask the sense of 
the Senate to be expressed upon each of them ; but I shall offer that re- 
lating to the District of Columbia and that to the Territory of Florida as 
an amendment to the fifth resolution submitted by the Senator from South 
Carolina. I think the charge upon the petitioners of intermeddling with 
abolition in this District is harsh, and that some less oflensive word should 
be used. The District of Columbia is the seat of the common Govern- 
ment of the United States. It was ceded for that express purpose. 
Each State has as much interest in it, and as much right to peti- 
tion about any thing within it, as any other State, and no more. 
Nor can I concur with the resolution, in declaring that the abolition of 
slavery in the District of Columbia would be a direct and dangerous at- 
tack upon the institution of slavery in the States. I am prepared to 
say that it would excite " a degree of just alarm and apprehension in the 
States recognising slavery, far transcending, in mischievous tendency, 
any possible benefit which could be accomplished by the abolition," 
or to use any other equivalent language. We can no more say that the 
abolition of slavery in this District would be a direct attack upon the in- 
stitution in the States, than we could assert, if any one of the slaveholding 
States were to abolish slavery within its own limits, that would be a 
direct attack on the institution in other slaveholding States. Or, that 
Great Britain, by abolishing slavery in her West India possessions, made 
a direct attack upon it in the United States. Nor is the case at all al- 
tered by the motives, whatever they may be, which shall be avowed for 
abolition. In conclusion, I move the third resolution of the series which 
I have suggested, as an amendment to the fifth resolution proposed by 
the Senator from South Carolina. 

[Mr. Buchanan having spoken — ] 

Mr. Clay said that he entirely concurred with Mr. Buchanan, and 
must express his surprise that Mr. Webster did not view the matter in 
the same light. There were two objects in the grant of the ten miles 
square by the States of Virginia and Maryland. The first was to pro- 
vide a seat for the General Government of the confederacy ; and the 
second was to invest Congress with such municipal powers of govern- 
ment as were best adapted to the promotion of the happiness of the 
people of this District. In every exposition of the powers of the Gene- 
ral Government, in relation to this District, these two dJflTerent pur- 



,,,,^. - COHO.S. 




poses should be kept distinctly in ^ ■ItMl^^^^^^^^^ <•"» 

enjoyment of all the advantages inc \\\|\|\\P^^^^ 8^ ern- 

ment that slavery should be abolishe 8 ®**" -.^mct, nor is it ne- 
cessary for the happiness of the people here that it should be done. 
They, who are the party most directly interested, have not petitioned 
for it, and are known to be adverse to it. 

When the cession of the ten miles square was made by the Stales of 
Virginia and Maryland, slavery existed in both of those Commonwealths, 
and in the District. It continues to exist in them all. Can it be con- 
ceived that either of those States would have made the cession, if it had 
anticipated that, whilst slavery remained within them, it should have 
been abolished here, as it were, in their very bosom 1 Can it be con- 
ceived that, if they had foreseen the possibility of such an exercise of 
power by Congress, they would not have guarded against it by a 
suitable condition? Taking, then, the whole circumstances of the case 
together, I think thnt good faith fairly results from them, imposing an 
obligation upon Congress to abstain from the exercise of the power. 
During the period when the question of establishing a seat of Govern- 
ment was under consideration, various places were thought of, and, 
amongst others, the river Delaware. Now, let me suppose that Pennsyl- 
vania had granted ten miles square, including Philadelphia or Harris- 
burg : would it not have been a violation of good faith for Congress to 
introduce slavery in the heart of that great Commonwealth, which had 
abolished it by a memorable act passed during the revolutionary war? 
It is easy to conceive, both in public and in private life, of the exist- 
ence of a naked authority to do a thing, which honor, good faith, and 
fair dealing, forbid to be done. A man endorses a note in bank, to re- 
new another note in bank. The holder of the note would possess the 
power to apply it to a different object ; but would it not be a violation of 
good faiih, if, instead of renewing the note in bank, he were to go to a 
broker and sell it, appropriate the proceeds to another purpose, leave 
the original note undischarged, and thereby double the responsibility 
of the endorser? Whenever slavery shall be abolished in the States of 
Virginia and Maryland, the motives of its continuation in the District 
will cease to exist ; and the power possessed by Congress may be then 
fairly executed, without any violation of that good faith which, I think, 
now restrains its exercise. 



HBRARYOFCON 



011 896:: 



^ 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



011896 373 8 # 



pH8^ 



